Does this look familiar?
The following are simple and straightforward answers debunking the belief that 9/11 wasn't an inside job (as GOP conspiracy theorists insist on without being able to read and while supporting people like the GOP and Fox News):

1. 9/11 Wasn't An Inside Job Cause Popular Mechanic Said So

First off, lets be clear that there is nothing in America that can't be bought. The Supreme Court made it legal to spend as much money as one wants on an election (basically, legalized bribery). Spending money on an election means you use the money to buy TV adds and media spotlight, i.e. you can literally buy yourself into political power. But that's another issue (though it may be tied to this one as the decision handing over America to the highest bidder was a GOP led one).

Finally, to close part 1 of the proof, a whole list of coverups by the media proving it can be trusted to do an impartial analysis on anything related to the Bush Dynasty

Although time has made it tougher to buy studies to prove climate change is a hoax it has been very easy to buy politicians as bribery is now legal (kinda like Congress's uninvestigated law allowing insider trading for themselves... I think they now just allow it for thier friends in some way). Buying Fox is unnecessary since Rupert Murdoch, Robert Ailes and Karl Rove seem intent on the craziest schemes possible to keep thier cultlike following... but this is America, how long can they keep and maintain a cult using thier fake media? I hope its not forever. Anyways.

Note: A Few Of The Ideas Used By 9/11 Truth Debunkers That Popular Mechanic Proves Is Wrong;Popular Mechanics: "This is the first time that we are aware of, that a building taller than about 15 stories has collapsed primarily due to fires,"

Despite this being an UNPRECEDENTED phenomenon in the world of engineer and architecture... THE MEDIA KNEW BEFORE IT HAPPENED THAT IT WOULD!

By comparison, this is an image of a building that caught fire in Madrid, Spain;

Here is a close up of the building after a several hours of the fire... the fire is so hot the metal is bending (WTC7 isn't even a tenth as on fire as this building);

This last picture is the same building after the fire has been put out...it's still standing! (WTC 7 was on less fire & still collapsed FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY because of some cartoon NIST came up with using building architecture that does not exist);

Response: I got 2,353 Architects & Engineers agreeing with me, how many do you have?

INFO: Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth) is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of architects, engineers, and affiliates dedicated to researching and disseminating scientific information about the complete destruction of all three World Trade Center skyscrapers on September 11, 2001, with the ultimate goal of obtaining a truly independent investigation and supporting the victims in their pursuit of justice.- http://www.ae911truth.org/

The whole argument of the architects and engineers bought by the GOP is that the buildings couldn't have fallen by demolition BECAUSE there was no molten metal found (it's like they were crying for help and no one heard them!).

There were many tons of molten metal captured on camera so this argument is the weakest of them all and a smoking gun in it's own right;

3. The 9/11 Commission Had No Mention Of WTC 7 Because The Investigation Was Only Of Terror Attacks And That Building Just Fell On It's Own From Fire & Thus Didn't Need An Investigation

This has to be the stupidest debunking ever, 'you can't look at any other strange occurrences on that day because they were not directly linked to the topic under discussion by the mainstream media'. Sounds like something the GOP's lawyers might say. Trying to get someone off on a technicality says alot. Anyways.

Any building falling on 9/11 within the immediate vicinity of the WTC towers should be a cause for concern and investigation. Besides that fact, the fires in WTC 7 were so fierce that they couldn't even be seen and there was almost no falling debris damage caught on camera so the whole excuse if just based on randomly put together thoughts.

We don't have any example of buildings falling like they were made out of paper. We DO have examples of buildings staying up even after burning for days. Which is more likely to be a true that a modern skyscrapper in the immediate vicinity fell from fire by a freak accident eventhough that is architecturally impossible or that some shenanigans must have taken place for the building to fall. Afterall, for something that even the NIST said was historical unprecedented ( The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires), there was way too much coverage of the buildings fall before it actually fell,The building wasn't even close enough for falling debris to cause much damage especially when you look at the buildings around it that escaped...

By comparison, this is an image of a modern skyscraper building that caught fire in Madrid, Spain;

Here is a close up of the building after a several hours of the fire... the fire is so hot the metal is bending (WTC7 isn't even a tenth as on fire as this building);

This last picture is the same building after the fire has been put out...it's still standing! (WTC 7 was on less fire & still collapsed FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY because of some cartoon NIST came up with using building architecture that does not exist);

4. Building Wasn't In Free Fall - No Building Was

I heard one person say that the WTC towers fell over 12 seconds and thus couldn't have been demolished. How they think fire could make a modern skyscrapper, without even being totally on fire, to fall in 12 seconds is beyond me but since these sorts of answers tend to come from conservatives it is understandable.

So just focus on this... WTC 7 has been PROVEN to have fallen at freefall, i.e. it was definitely demolished and responses from Rudy Giuliani makes he clear he knew it before hand and covered it up later (with the media's continued help, obviously).The Proof Of WTC 7 In Freefall

From the video: Uploaded on 12 Feb 2010:
[This is a reposting of this video which was taken down from the original site, originally posted in August 2008 just after the release of the final draft of the NIST WTC7 Report, prior to the final version which was altered to admit a 2.25 second period of freefall.]
Proof of something weird going on with Rudy Giuliani that confirms that something is being covered up;

5. Media likes to bring out a "licensed" psychologist or psychiatrist who believe (read somewhere) that "conspiracy theorists" have psychological problems such as an 'escape from reality'... as if thier entire field wasn't a joke.

Secondly, the main influence factor is psychologist and doctor/PhD which creates a sort of immediate acceptance the way witch doctors must have. Of course, "having them say" may be a sort of over simplification. It's more like they find a psychologist who agrees with them and have them come on. Not everyone is intelligent no matter how many degrees or years of experience they have.

Thirdly, off the field of psychology is in no way a unified field. And it's biggest achievements in accomplishments seem to have come from outside of it and yet they still haven't achieved prominence (though they are more prevalent today than before).

Fourthly, a psychologist is not qualified to make comments about architecture and engineering and nor can they compete with the military analysis of a Major General. So they have thier place in a cover-up and/or interrogation but should be able to be left standing looking stupid pretty easy for the prepared questioner.Related post showing the problems with psychiatry & thus revealing a structural problem in the field of psychology:

I've noticed people like to point out that the WTC towers didn't fall EXACTLY at breakneck speed. It's a strange argument. The building wasn't designed to fall from fire - and couldn't have fallen from any sort of fire otherwise it wouldn't have been built (it's a metal skyscrapper for Christs sake!). IN any case, an MIT engineer has explained that it was impossible for the fire to reach the core of the building anyways so the way it fell was impossible anyways so if it fell a little slower than free fall all that proves is that they blew up the bombs slower to create more debris. The falling building is still an architectural impossibility. Here is the MIT engineer explaining this;

Problem of Personal Belief: "One Engineer Is Enough To Prove Me Right, No Matter How Many Engineers You Bring Against My Belief & The Engineer That Supports my Belief"

The last thing I noticed is people's desperation to find one link or one engineer to back up thier beliefs. I can find many. There's a whole organization filled with hundreds of Architects and engineers saying what I'm saying (I got it form them). ALSO, the BBC documentary on WTC 7 (the post everyone is commenting on without reading) shows very clearly that foreign engineer say the way WTC collapsed is impossible while US Government appointed officials are saying its possible. That's suspicious enough. Even funnier is that basic science can't be denied by any scientific investigation and they try and find a way around it. Thus the most popular explanation by the conspiracy theorists who think 9/11 WASN'T an inside job, i.e. that Jet Fuel caused the collapse is debunked by Popular Mechanics while claiming that it still fell. And the NIST engineer who claims it wasn't an inside job (another crazy conspiracy theorist) had to claim that no molten metal was found at the WTC site DESPITE the tons of footage and eyewitness testimony AND pictures. If you have no proof and you keep making a claim THAT makes you a conspiracy theorist (as people seem to define the word "conspiracy" nowadays - It's the Corporation and Government appointed engineers that are making the conspiracy claims not the others.A Major General talks about how difficult it was for him to accept the truth but his training in the army forced him to accept the truth that 9/11 is an inside job;

Quotes

"Make peace with the universe. Take joy in it. It will turn to gold. Resurrection will be now. Every moment, a new beauty." - Rumi

"God is a metaphor for that which transcends all levels of intellectual thought. It's as simple as that." - Joseph Campbell

"Naturally, every age thinks that all ages before it were prejudiced, and today we think this more than ever and are just as wrong as all previous ages that thought so. How often have we not seen the truth condemned! It is sad but unfortunately true that man learns nothing from history." - Carl Jung

"Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought most to be deprecated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society." - George Washington

“If a problem is fixable, if a situation is such that you can do something about it, then there is no need to worry. If it's not fixable, then there is no help in worrying. There is no benefit in worrying whatsoever.” - Dalai Lama

“Be empty of worrying. Think of who created thought! Why do you stay in prison. When the door is so wide open?” ― Rumi